Research Study – Florida International University – Spring, 2020.docx

Research Study – Florida International University – Spring,
2020
Part I: Imagine you saw the following Facebook Page. Carefully
read EVERYTHING on this page, as we will ask you about your
impressions of Abigail Foster (the Facebook owner) on the next
page of this survey.
Abigail Foster
Part II: Without looking back, please rate your impressions of
Abigail Foster’s test-taking behavior below
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6
1. Abigail’s behavior was wrong
2. Abigail’s behavior was understandable

3. Abigail’s behavior was reasonable
4. Abigail’s behavior was unethical
5. Abigail’s behavior was immoral
6. Abigail’s behavior was appropriate
7. Abigail’s behavior was unacceptable

Part III: Without looking back, please rate how YOU would
advise Abigail, rate how YOU would respond if you mistakenly
received the answer key from the professor, and then generally
rate Abigail
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6
1. I would advise Abigail to keep silent
2. I would try to comfort Abigail
3. I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends gave
her

4. If I received the answers, I would keep silent
5. If I received the answers, I would confess
6. Abigail seems warm
7. Abigail seems good-natured
8. Abigail seems confident

9. Abigail seems competitive
10. Abigail seems sincere
11. Abigail seems moral
12. Abigail seems competent
Part IV: Please provide the following demographic information.
Note: you can leave blank any question you feel uncomfortable
answering.
1. What is your gender (Mark one with an X)? _____
Male _____ Female
2. What is your age? __________
3. What is your race/ethnicity? (Mark one with an X):
___ Caucasian ___ Hispanic American ____ Native Indian

___ African American
___ Asian American Other: __________________ (Please
Indicate)
4. Is English your first language? (Mark one with an X):
_____ Yes _____ No
If no, what is your first language? __________________
5. Are you a student at FIU (Mark one with an X):
_____ Yes ______ No
6. What is your relationship status? _____ Single / No
Relationship _____ In a relationship
Part V: Without looking back, what general feedback did
Abigail’s friends give her? (Mark one with an X)
___ The feedback supported her behavior ___ The feedback
opposed her behavior ___ Feedback was mixed
OC
2020
Abigail Foster
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4

5
6

rate Abigail
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6

her

answering.
Male _____ Female
Indicate)
_____ Yes _____ No
_____ Yes ______ No
MC
2020

Abigail Foster
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6

rate Abigail

Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6
her

answering.
Male _____ Female
Indicate)
_____ Yes _____ No

_____ Yes ______ No
SC
Study Set-Up
Main Theme and Three Level Independent Variable: Morally
ambiguous situation presented via a Facebook post with the
female user asking for her friends’ opinions regarding her
actions. In some, there is 100% consensus favorable to what she
did; in another there is 100% consensus unfavorable to what she
did; in the last there is a mixture of positive and negative
feedback.
Moral Dilemma: The user relates a story that the instructor
handed out exams in class in a class where she was really
struggling with the content, but must have included the answer
key in the version she got. She didn’t say anything, and simply
copied down the correct answers (though she missed a few so it
wasn’t so obvious she was cheating). She still got the highest
grade by far in the class. The instructor curves the scores, so
she knows that her benefit hurt other students. She feels bad
about it, and wants to know if students think she is a terrible
person and whether she should tell the instructor what
happened.
Dependent variables:
1. Warm-Cold Scale
2. Accepting / Rejecting what she did
3. Self-Ratings

Abigail’s Post
So, I did something ... well, something I'm kind of embarrassed
about. I've been having a hard time in my statistics class, and I
knew I was going to fail the exam. I studied for it so hard, too!
Well, the prof handed out the exam, and he must have made a
mistake, because when I got my test, it turned out it was (wait
for it!) ... the answer key. I know, I know. I should have turned
it in, but I REALLY needed to pass the exam. I used the answer
key, and got the best score on the exam. Turns out the rest of
the class did really bad, and the prof said he had planned to
curve the grade. However, since someone got a perfect score,
there was no curve needed. I'm sure if I'd done worse, the curve
would have brought some other student scores up. So am I a bad
person? Should I tell the prof what happened. I don't know.
Help!
Positive Feedback (Consensus)
1. Wow, Abigail, sounds like you really lucked out there. Take
the grade. You “earned” it!
2. I agree. You got lucky! Incredibly lucky! I’d probably take
the grade, too. I’ve taken that class, and it is impossibly hard.
Anything you can do to make it a bit easier on yourself is worth
it.
3. Listen, it’s not like you intended to cheat going into the
exam. The prof should have checked to make sure he was only
handing out blank exams. His mistake – your big break! Take
the grade
4. Yeah, I’m of the same opinion. Don’t look a gift horse in the
mouth! Take the win
5. You know that if you didn’t get the answer key, another
student would have and then THEY would have the highest
grade and you’d lose out in the curve. Don’t feel too bad
6. I’ve read the other comments on your wall, Abigail, and I
think they gave you some good advice. If you go to the prof
now, you might get in real trouble, and it’s not like you went in

planning to use the answer key.
7. What can I say that hasn’t already been said? Their loss –
your gain!
8. If it were me, I’d tell the prof … NOT! Don’t be crazy, Abby.
You might blow the next exam, so it will all even out in the end
Negative Feedback (Consensus)
1. Wow, Abigail, though it sounds like you really lucked out
there, you can’t take the grade. You didn’t really “earn” it!
2. I agree. You got lucky! Dishonorably lucky. I’d never take
the grade. I’ve taken that class, and it is impossibly hard, but
taking the easy way out isn’t worth it.
handing out blank exams. His mistake – but your integrity.
Don’t take the grade
4. Yeah, I’m of the same opinion. Look this gift horse in the
mouth! It’s a loser
grade and you’d lose out in the curve. How would you feel
then?
think they gave you some good advice. If you don’t go to the
prof now, you might get in real trouble later. Just tell him it’s
not like you went in planning to use the answer key.
7. What can I say that hasn’t already been said? The whole class
lost – only you gained.
8. If it were me, I’d tell the prof … DEFINITELY! Don’t be
crazy, Abby. You might ace the next exam, so it will all even
out in the end if you tell
Middling Feedback (No Consensus)
1. Wow, Abigail, though it sounds like you really lucked out
there, you can’t take the grade. You didn’t really “earn” it!
2. I disagree. You got lucky! Incredibly lucky! I’d probably

take the grade, too. I’ve taken that class, and it is impossibly
hard. Anything you can do to make it a bit easier on yourself is
worth it.
handing out blank exams. His mistake – but your integrity.
Don’t take the grade
4. Yeah, I’m of the same opinion. Look this gift horse in the
mouth! It’s a loser
grade and you’d lose out in the curve. Don’t feel too bad
think they gave you some good advice. If you go to the prof
now, you might get in real trouble, and it’s not like you went in
planning to use the answer key.
7. What can I say that hasn’t already been said? The whole class
lost – only you gained.
8. If it were me, I’d tell the prof … NOT! Don’t be crazy, Abby.
You might blow the next exam, so it will all even out in the end
https://www.classtools.net/FB/1461-xvmsXS
Stimulus Materials and Researcher Instructions – Spring, 2020 –
Consensus / Conformity Study
Instructions:This Spring, 2020, we are going to run a series of
studies looking at how participants respond to a cheating
scenario. We’ll do this by showing participants a fake Facebook
page that contains the user’s confession to cheating followed by
different feedback comments from her friends (opposing,
supporting, or mixed feedback). The main focus of our study is
to see how our participants perceive the cheating based on
whether the user’s friends are unanimously supportive,

oppositional, or mixed in response to the cheating. Because
research suggests that people don’t like to break unanimity, the
likelihood is high that participants will conform their own
feedback and thoughts about cheating in the same direction as
the user’s friends.
1). For your first experimental study, you will play the role of
researcher, and you will collect data from three different
participants (though you will combine your data with other class
members, so your final data set will have nearly 140 people!).
There are two phases to this study. In the first phase, you will
orally ask participants if they are willing to participate in a
research study. In the second phase, participants will complete a
five-part survey. In Part One, participants will read the “About”
Facebook page for a college student named Abigail Foster,
getting some general information about Abigail, looking at a
confession that she made about cheating on an exam, and
reading the feedback that her friends gave her regarding her
cheating. In Part Two, participants will rate Abigail’s behavior.
In Part Three, participants will rate how they would respond to
Abigail, how they would respond themselves in the same
situation, and provide some ratings of their general impressions
of Abigail. In Part Four, participants will complete demographic
questions. Finally, in Part Five, participants will tell us about
the general nature of the feedback Abigail’s friends gave her
(our manipulation check in this study). To run this study, use
the following steps:
A). Your first task is to approach three different participants
(not all at the same time!). They must be people that you do not
know, and cannot be taking a psychology research methods
class during the Fall, 2019 semester or the Spring, 2020
semester. Please DO NOT complete this study yourself, and use
only FIU students or strangers as participants (no family /
friends for this study – You will use them in a later replication
study toward the end of the summer semester). There are 48
students in our class, so with each student getting data from 3
people, our final sample will be around 140 participants total.

B). Phase I: Informed Consent
1). Informed Consent:
· Ask the potential participant if he or she is willing to
participate in a study for your research methods class. You will
get their informed consent verbally. Tell them:
“Hello, this semester in my psychology research methods class,
we are collecting different types of data (demographic
information, open-ended questions, scaled questions, etc.) that
we will analyze in our statistical lab. I was wondering if you
would be willing to participate in my study. The study takes
about five to ten minutes. There are no risks to participating,
and the main benefit is that I can complete my class assignment.
Will you participate?”
· An oral Yes or No response is fine. If they say no, thank them
and find a different participant. If they say yes, move to the
next step (Phase II – Questionnaire).
C). Phase II: “Questionnaire”
1). General Instructions
· After getting participant’s oral informed consent, randomly
give them ONE of the three “Research Study – Florida
International University – Spring, 2020” documents. These
documents contain our primary independent and dependent
variables for the study. One third of our research participants
will be in the “Support” consensus condition, one third will be
in the “Oppose” consensus condition, and one third will be in
the “Mixed” condition. Participants should not know what
condition they are in.
· Ask participants to follow the instructions at the top of the
questionnaire. Tell them to read EVERYTHING on the
Facebook page, as they will answer questions about it later and
will need to do so through memory. They can move through the
five “Parts” in this survey at their own pace. Make sure they
complete all questionnaire parts (though they can leave some
demographic questions blank if they do not want to provide the
details).

2). Questionnaire
· In Part I, participants look at the Facebook “About” page for a
college student named Abigail Foster. The page contains a
picture masthead profile picture of Abigail, a generic “About”
section (which contains basic information About Abigail), fake
advertisements, a “Friends” list with selfies of six friends, and a
long paragraph that Abigail posted earlier that day. This
paragraph is very important, as it discusses an incident in which
Abigail accidentally received an exam answer key during an
exam and used it to get the best grade in the course (raising the
curve and potentially hurting the scores of other test-takers).
She feels bad about it, and wants some help from her friends.
Please note that EVERYTHING on the Facebook page up to this
point is identical across all three conditions (but don’t tell
participants that!). So what differs? The comments from her
friends! You will notice that in one survey, the comments
universally support her cheating. In another survey, the
comments universally oppose her cheating. The comments on
the third survey are more mixed. That is …
· In the “Support” consensus condition, there are eight
comments from Abigail’s friends, which universally support her
cheating. These include comments like, “Wow, Abigail, sounds
like you really lucked out there. Take the grade. You “earned”
it!” and “Listen, it’s not like you intended to cheat going into
the exam. The prof should have checked to make sure he was
handing out only blank exams. His mistake – your big break!
Take the grade.”
· In the “Oppose” consensus condition, there are eight
comments from Abigail’s friends, which universally oppose her
cheating. These include comments like, “Wow, Abigail, though
it sounds like you really lucked out there, you can’t take the
grade. You didn’t really “earn” it!” and “Listen, it’s not like
you intended to cheat going into the exam. The prof should have
checked to make sure he was handing out only blank exams. His

mistake – but your integrity! Don’t take the grade.”
· In the “Mixed” no consensus condition, there are once again
eight comments from Abigail’s friends, but these are more
mixed (with some of the same oppose comments from the
“Oppose” condition and some of the same support comments
from the “Support” conditions intermixed). Thus there is no real
consensus in this condition
· A quick note for you (the researcher): If you look at the
bottom of the survey in the footer on the second survey page,
you will see one of the following: “S”, “O”, or “M”, which
relate to the three study conditions – That is, S is for “Support”,
O is for “Oppose”, and M is for “Mixed”. It’s a nice shorthand
so you can tell which survey the participant completed (but this
is not something you need to report in your papers – it’s just a
handy reference for you as you collect data)
· In Part II, participants will rate their impressions of Abigail
Foster’s behavior (the Facebook user). Here, participants are
asked to agree or disagree with seven statements about Abigail,
with all seven using an interval scale ranging from 1 (Strongly
Disagree) to 6 (Strongly Agree). These statements include,
“Abigail’s behavior was wrong”, Abigail’s behavior was
understandable”, “Abigail’s behavior was reasonable”,
“Abigail’s behavior was unethical”, “Abigail’s behavior was
immoral”, “Abigail’s behavior was appropriate”, and “Abigail’s
behavior was unacceptable.” Although you can look at any (or
all) of these seven statements when you write Paper II (which
focuses on the methods and results for this study), you only
need to focus on one of them in your later analyses. You’ll note
that many of them are similar (terms like “wrong”, “immoral”,
“unethical”, and “unacceptable” are similar, and will produce
similar ratings). We expect participant ratings to differ
depending on their condition. That is, participants will probably
rate Abigail’s behavior as more wrong, immoral, unethical, and

unacceptable (and less understandable, reasonable, and
appropriate) in the “Oppose Consensus” condition than in the
“Support Consensus” condition, with those in the “Mixed
Consensus” condition falling closer to the center of the rating
scales. That is, participant responses will conform to the
consensus of Abigail’s friends.
· In Part III, participants will rate several statements about what
advice they would give Abigail, how they would respond in the
same situation, and provide ratings of their general impressions
of Abigail. Statements 1, 2, and 3 relate to the advice they
would give Abigail (“I would advise Abigail to keep silent”, “I
would try to comfort Abigail”, and “I would give Abigail the
same advice that her friends gave her”). We expect once again
that participant ratings will differ depending on their condition,
with “Oppose” consensus participants less likely to endorse
keeping silent or comforting Abigail than “Support” consensus
participants. The third question, though, is very interesting. If
conformity is really working in our study, then both “Support”
consensus and “Oppose” consensus participants should strongly
agree with statement 3! That is, we shouldn’t see differences
between those conditions. Statements 4 and 5 are based on how
the participant would respond in the same situation. Given
social desirability biases, participants will most likely respond
in a socially desirable way (say they would not keep silent). The
remaining items in statements six through twelve are based on
the warmth/competency scales developed by Fiske. We will
probably ignore these in our own analyses, but it might be
interesting to see how participants rate Abigail in terms of her
personality traits.
· In Part IV, participants will complete demographic questions.
Most of these items are easy to complete without violating
participant’s privacy, but they will know they can leave blank
any question(s) they feel uncomfortable answering.

· In Part V, participants will tell us whether the feedback
Abigail received from her friends tended to support her
behavior, oppose her behavior, or was more mixed. Unlike the
statements in Parts II and III (which used interval scales,
allowing us to analyze them with t-Tests or ANOVAs), the
nominal scale used in Part V (three answer options in no
particular order) only permit us to use a chi square analysis.
We’ll discuss those more as we get to Paper Two.
D). Once participants have completed the questionnaire, debrief
them regarding the study. That is, tell them about Conformity /
Consensus and your main hypothesis. Read them the following:
“Thank you for participating. The purpose of this study is to
determine if Facebook feedback that seems to support or oppose
cheating impacts how participants perceived that cheating. That
is, will Facebook feedback that appears to support (versus
oppose) a friend who cheated on an exam influence how
participants perceive that cheating? To study this possibility,
participants all read the same cheating scenario in which a girl
(Abigail) cheated on an exam by using an answer key the
professor mistakenly gave her. When seeking advice from her
friends, he friends either gave her unanimouslysupportive
feedback (“Wow, Abigail, sounds like you really lucked out
there. Take the grade. You “earned” it!” and “Listen, it’s not
like you intended to cheat going into the exam. The prof should
have checked to make sure he was handing out only blank
exams. His mistake – your big break! Take the grade.”),
unanimouslyoppositional feedback (“Wow, Abigail, though it
sounds like you really lucked out there, you can’t take the
grade. You didn’t really “earn” it!” and “Listen, it’s not like
you intended to cheat going into the exam. The prof should have
checked to make sure he was handing out only blank exams. His
mistake – but your integrity! Don’t take the grade.”), or mixed
feedback. The word “unanimous” is important here. When the
feedback is unanimous (either in support of the user or opposing
her), it is harder to voice a contrary opinion. When feedback is

mixed, it is easier to voice a true opinion.
In general, we predict that participants who read unanimously
supportive feedback will rate the Facebook user’s conduct as
more acceptable than participants who read unanimously
oppositional feedback, with those who read mixed feedback
falling between these extremes.
More specifically, participants in the unanimously supportive
condition will more strongly agree with supportive survey
statements (“Abigail’s behavior was understandable, “Abigail’s
behavior was reasonable”, “Abigail’s behavior was
appropriate”, “I would advise Abigail to keep silent”, and “I
would try to comfort Abigail”) and more strongly disagree with
oppositional survey statements (“Abigail’s behavior was
wrong”, “Abigail’s behavior was unethical”, “Abigail’s
behavior was immoral”, and “Abigail’s behavior was
unacceptable”) compared to participants in the unanimously
oppositional condition, with participants in the mixed condition
falling between these extremes. However, participants in both
the unanimously supportive and unanimously oppositional
conditions will strongly agree that they would give Abigail the
same advice that her friends gave her.**
We will test these hypotheses in our methods course this
semester. Thank you for participating!
**Methods Students: Note that the underlined paragraphs above
will be helpful when you write Paper I! In fact, you can use that
underlined paragraphs in your first paper if you like (just copy
and paste it into your hypotheses). However, the predictions
ARE NOT INCLUDED in your minimum page count. That is,
you can copy/paste the predictions, but they do not count in the
page minimum! Also note that in the last sentence in this
paragraph, I highlighted eight different dependent variables
(understandable, reasonable, wrong, etc.). Since you are not

required to analyze every dependent variable in Part III of your
survey, feel free to edit this last paragraph to include ONLY the
two dependent variables that you actually analyzed (this applies
mostly to Paper II when you figure out which DVs you want to
focus on in your Results Section analysis. There is no point in
making predictions about dependent variables you did not
actually analyze, so just focus on the two dependent variable
most relevant to your own study in your predictions.)
2). Hold onto the completed questionnaires, as you will use
them in an upcoming lab. You will enter data into SPSS and
analyze it during your lab. Important note: Each student
researcher is responsible for collecting data from three
participants (one participant for each study condition – OC, SC
and MC). However, we will combine survey data from ALL
students in your lab section, so your final sample will include at
least 140 or so participants. In your papers (especially Paper II),
you will use this total set of research participants (at least 140),
NOT just the three that you collected yourself. Don’t even
discuss “Three participants”, as that is not correct. Discuss ALL
140 participants in your papers
3). One last note: Pay close attention to these instructions! You
can use them as the basis for Paper II later this semester when
you discuss your methods section. That being said, these
instructions are too long for a methods section, and includes
information you will need to omit for Paper II. When writing
that paper, make sure to only report the important aspects (what
you actually did in the study). Write about what you actually
did in the study!
Running head: METHODS, RESULTS DISCUSSION
INSTRUCTIONS 1

Instructions for Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and
Discussion (Worth 35 Points)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
PAPER II: METHODS AND RESULTS INSTRUCTIONS 2
Purpose of Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and
Discussion
1). Psychological Purpose
The psychological purpose behind Paper II is to make sure you
can tell your reader what
you did on your study, how you did it, and what you found. By
now you have read several
empirical studies in psychology, and you should be familiar
with the Methods, Results, and

Discussion sections. Now is your chance to write Methods,
Results and Discussion!
Like those prior studies you looked at in Paper I, you will
provide information about your
participants, materials, and procedure in your Methods section.
Your participant section
goes first, and it includes descriptive statistics about your
sample (means and standard
deviations for age as well as percentages for gender and
race/ethnicity). Your materials and
procedure sections include information about what you did and
how you did it. You should
write this section for an audience who is unfamiliar with your
specific study, but assume
that they do know research methods. Thus educate your reader
about your materials and
procedure, giving enough detail so they could replicate the
study. This includes explicitly
describing your independent and dependent variables and
talking about how you presented
those variables to your participants. My suggestion is to look
over the articles you
summarized in Paper I and see how they wrote their Methods.
This will give you a good

idea regarding the level of depth and detail you need in your
own Methods section.
Your Results section follows. The purpose of this section is to
make sure you can show
how you analyzed the data and describe what you found. You
will have a lot of help in this
section from your lab instructors.
Finally, I want you to include a short description of your
findings. Tell me if you supported
or did not support your hypotheses and explain why you got
those results (you can actually
speculate here if you like, but make it an “educated”
speculation!)
2). APA Formatting Purpose
The second purpose of Paper II: Methods, Results and
Discussion is to once again teach
you proper American Psychological Association (APA)
formatting for these sections. In
the pages below, I will tell you how to format your paper using
APA style. There are a lot
of very specific requirements in APA papers (as specific as
what to italicize), so pay
attention to the instructions below as well as Chapter 14 in your

textbook!
3). Writing Purpose
Finally, this paper is intended to help you figure out how to
write a Methods, Results, and
Discussion section. Many students find statistics daunting, but
my hope here is that writing
this paper will help you understand both the logic and format of
statistics in results
sections. We will once again give you a lot of feedback and help
in this paper, which you
help you when you write Papers IV and V later in the course.
Make sure that you write this
for an audience familiar with APA methods and results, but also
for someone who needs
you to tell them what you found.
Note: The plagiarism limit is higher in this paper (up to 65%)
since your classmates are doing the
same design. Don’t go higher than that, though! 65% is the
maximum allowed!
Note: You do NOT need to include your literature review /

hypotheses in Paper II, as Paper II
focuses just on your methods, results, and discussion. However,
you’ll include those Paper I
components later in Paper III, so do keep them handy!
Sorry for the length of the instructions! They are long, but take
it one section at a time and you will
get all of the content you need for your paper. It also increases
your chances of getting a great
grade!
Methods
1. Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):
a. The title page for your Paper II is identical to the one you
used for Paper I:

Literature Review Study One. For proper APA formatting,
either copy your title
page from Paper I or review the title page instructions I gave
you in Paper I. You
can change your title if you like, but make sure it helps to
describe your study
(much like a title in PsycInfo describes what the authors did in
their paper)
2. Abstract?
a. You DO NOT need an abstract for Paper II: Methods, Results,
and Discussion
(Study One). You cannot write it until you run both study one
and two, so omit it
for now
3. Methods Section: I expect the following format (15 points):
a. For this paper, the methods section starts on page 2.
b. Write Method at the top of this page, make it bold, and center
it (see the top of this
page as an example!)
c. The participants section comes next. The word Participants is
bolded and left
justified. In this section …
i. Tell me who your participants were (college students, family
members,
friends?) and how many there were.

1. Note: If a number starts a sentence, then spell out the
number. That
is, “Two-hundred and five participants participated in this
study.”
2. If a number is mid-sentence, you can use numerals. “There
were 205
participants in this study.”
3. But keep numbers consistent. If you spell out a number at the
start of
the sentence, carry that through and spell out other numbers in
the
sentence.
4. For statistics, always use numbers (for the mean, SD, %, etc.)
ii. Provide frequencies and descriptive statistics for relevant
demographics.
1. For some variables—like ethnicity and gender—you only
need to
provide frequency information (the number of participants who
fit
that category). “There were 100 men (49%) and 105 women
(51%)
in the study.” Or “The sample was 49% male (N = 100) and 51%
female (N = 105).”
2. Other variables—like age—are continuous (rather than
categorical),
so use descriptive statistics here (the range, mean, and the

standard
deviation). “Participants ranged in age from 18 to 77 (M = 24,
SD =
3.50).” or “The average age of participants was 24 (SD =
3.50).”
Your TA can help you find the mean and standard deviation for
this
assignment, though information is also available in a lab
powerpoint.
3. Make sure to italicize the N, M, and SD (the letters, not the
numbers)
d. Materials and Procedure
i. For this section, things are flexible. Some studies include
Materials and
Procedure in the same section while others break them up into
two sections.
This is a matter of choice.
1. In general, the more complex the design, the better it is to
split up
the methods and results. In one section, the author may describe
the
materials; in the next, they describe what participants did with

those
materials (the procedure). This is one option for you. However
…
2. However, your “Paper II: Methods, Results and Discussion
(Study
One)” is simple enough that I strongly recommend combining
them
into one overall Materials and Procedure section.
ii. Again, the words Materials and Procedure are flush left. In
this section …
1. Provide information about your materials and your procedure.
a. I suggest starting with your procedure. Tell your reader what
your participants did in the order that participants did them.
Be specific here. I have the following recommendations:
i. First, talk about the oral informed consent procedure.
ii. Second, talk about the three versions of the Facebook
Consensus study questionnaire. Provide enough detail
so that your readers know how the three conditions
differ. Imagine I do not know what you did, but I
need to able to replicate your design. YOU need to
give me enough detail so I can do so. (Hint: Copy and
paste the various questions or refer the reader to an

appendix that has those materials!)
1. I want to stress that – pretend I have no idea
what you did, but I want to repeat your design
and procedures. That means you need to be
VERY clear and detailed about what you did
and how you did it.
2. At the end of the semester (for Paper V),
someone other than your instructor / TA may
grade your paper. They may know NOTHING
about Consensus or Conformity, though they
do know methods. Thus go into painstaking
detail about what EACH section of the survey
page looked like, including the participant
instructions and the pictures
iii. Third, talk about your dependent variables (that is,
your survey questions. For these dependent variables,
once again provide enough detail so I know exactly
what questions you asked. For example, “Participants
provided their gender, age, and race”. For other
dependent variables, tell me how the responses were

recorded (yes/no, true/false, a scale of 1 to 6, etc.). If
you used a scale, note the endpoints. That is, does a 1
mean it is high or is it low? “Participants were asked,
‘How frustrating was this task?’, and they responded
on a scale from 1 (very frustrating) to 9 (not at all
frustrating).’” Your study has a few really important
DVs (including several DVs about participant
impressions of Abigail and her cheating behavior as
well as whether the participant agrees with the advice
of Abigail’s friends. For these DVs, you again need to
tell me what they are specifically!
iv. Fourth, make sure to highlight which specific DVs
you analyzed. If there are DVs participants completed
but you did not analyze it, feel free to say those that
participants completed them but since they were not
analyzed, they are not discussed further.

v. Fifth, make sure to be specific about your attention /
manipulation check question!
vi. Finally, mention debriefing
e. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the
methods section, but I
would expect at least a page or two (though probably more.
After all, your own
research script took up several pages – you should provide a
similar level of depth
and detail in your methods section!). Missing important aspects
of your IVs and
DVs or presenting them in a confused manner will lower your
score in this section.
f. Remember, make sure that another researcher can replicate
your study based on
your methods section. If they can’t, then you may not have
enough detail!
4. Results Section: I expect the following format (10 points):
a. The results are the hardest part of this paper, and your lab
powerpoints will help
you with this part of the paper (also refer to the crash course
statistics quizzes,
which walk you through similar analyses!).
b. First, write Results at the top of this section, center it, and
use boldface. This

section comes directly at the end of the methods section, so the
results section
DOES NOT start on its own page.
c. For this assignment, include statistics about the most
important variables in your
study, including your IV (Condition – Support, Oppose, and
Mixed) and the DVs
you feel are most important to your hypotheses. There are
several important DVs in
your survey, including all of those in Part II (regarding
cheating) and the first three
DVs in Part III, especially Part III Question #3. All of these
variables really focus
on your predictions. Note that some instructors may not do this
Facebook
Consensus study at all, but the results section should follow the
same guidelines
regardless of your study topic.
d. More specifically, you must run at least three different
analyses on three
different dependent variables. One must be a chi square for the
question asking
participants which to recall how well Pat did in his job
interview (our manipulation
check, which looks at the three options for the nominal variable

in Part V). One
analysis must be a One Way ANOVA (I recommend looking at
any of the
statements in Part II). The third analysis should be a t-Test on
Part III Question #3.
Why? Because the mixed condition makes this question tough
for participants to
answer (the question asks if they would give the same advice as
Abigail’s friends,
but because the mixed condition mixes oppositional and
supportive comments, it is
tough to know what the “same advice” would involve. A t-Test
just looking at the
two consensus groups is best here). Of course, you can run
ANOVA’s or t-Tests on
virtually all of the Part II and Part III Questions, but you cannot
look at the same
DV with both a t-Test and an ANOVA. We count the number of
DVs that you
analyze – NOT the number of statistical tests you run!

i. Chi square: Your first analysis will be a chi square, which
you use if your
DV is categorical (yes / no; yes / no / maybe; male / female, or
... in our
case, we have our “Feedback” question in Part V (The feedback
supported
Abigail’s behavior; opposed it; was mixed). So let’s discuss the
chi square,
which doesn’t look at means but rather counts how many
responses there are
compared to how many you would expect.
1. Consider the DV in Part V of your questionnaire – “Without
looking
back, what general feedback did Abigail’s friends give her?
(Mark
one with an X)” The options were supported, opposed, or
mixed.
Here, you can run a chi square looking at the frequencies of the
three
answer options
2. We are interested in the chi square (χ2) and p value. We also
provide
percentages for each of our groups (rather than means and SD).
a. “Using Facebook consensus condition as our independent
variable (support, oppose, or mixed) and recall of the

feedback Abigail’s friends gave her as the dependent
variable, we saw a significant effect, χ2(4) = 68.49, p < .001.
Most participants in the “support” condition recalled
“supporting” feedback (98%); most participants in the
“oppose” condition recalled a “oppositional” feedback
(96%); and most participants in mixed condition recalled an
“mixed” feedback (90%). This indicates that participants saw
our manipulation as intended.”
b. Alternatively, you can just look at correct versus incorrect
responses. This is a bit trickier to run in SPSS, since you
need to add up ALL those who correctly remembered the
correct feedback (those in the support condition who recalled
“supportive feedback” + those in the oppose condition who
recalled “oppositional feedback” + those in the mixed
condition who recalled “mixed feedback”) and compare them
to ALL the people who were incorrect in their recall. In this
instance, you wouldn’t want the chi square to be significant.
That is, you might conclude that χ2(4) = 1.49, p > .05,
indicating that there was no difference between those who

got the manipulation check question correct across the three
different conditions. (In other words, participants weren’t
more correct in one condition compared to another). My
advice is to go with the chi square in a. above
c. Make sure to italicize the χ and p
ii. ANOVA: Since you have a condition independent variable
with three levels
(e.g. Support, Oppose, or Mixed), the most appropriate test is a
One-Way
ANOVA if your DV is scaled (like a 0 to 5 scale or a 1 to 6
scale). Your lab
and lecture powerpoints show you how to conduct an ANOVA,
but there are
some guidelines I want to give you about how to write your
results. Below, I
am going to walk you through one analysis specific to this
paper. However,
keep in mind that you can run ANOVAs on several different
DVs.
1. First, there are several dependent variables to choose from.
For my
example analysis below, I want to focus on Part II in your
survey

(cheating impressions). Since each of these seven questions are
scaled variables that range from 1 to 6, each uses an interval
scale,
which is perfect for an ANOVA.
2. Second, given that this study has one IV with three levels and
we
will look at one DV at a time, a One-Way ANOVA is the best
test to
use to see if there are significant differences among the three IV
levels for that one DV. We look first at the ANOVA table (or F
table) and focus on the between subject factor. We note the
degrees
of freedom, the F value itself, and the p value. (We’ll get into
two-
way ANOVAs later in this course, but here we only have one
independent variable, so it is a one-way ANOVA. Yes, we have
three levels to our IV, but it is still only one IV).
3. If the p value is significant (less than .05), we have one more
step to
take. Since this is a three level IV, we need to compare mean A

to
mean B, mean A to mean C, and mean B to mean C. We do this
using a post hoc test (try using Tukey!). That will tell us which
of the
means differ significantly. You then write up the results. For
example, let’s say I ran an ANOVA on the dependent variable
“Abigail’s behavior was wrong”. My write up would look like
this
(though note: I completely made up the data below, so don’t
copy
the numbers!) …
a. “Using consensus condition (support v. oppose v. mixed) as
our independent variable and ratings of “Abigail’s behavior
was wrong” as the dependent variable, we found a significant
condition effect, F(2, 203) = 4.32, p < .05. Tukey post hoc
tests showed that participants felt the cheating was less
wrong in the support condition (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21) than
participants in both the oppose (M = 4.24, SD = 0.89) and
mixed (M = 4.23, SD = 0.77) conditions. The oppose and
mixed conditions, however, did not differ from each other.

This supports our prediction that participants exposed to
unanimously supportive friend comments would similarly
support Abigail, while any opposition (whether unanimous or
not) would make her behavior seem more wrong.”
i. Note there are lots of possible outcomes. The one
above essentially says that condition S (support)
differed from O (oppose) and M (mixed), but that O
and M did not differ from each other (In other words,
S ≠ O = M). However, we might also find that NONE
of the three conditions differ from each other, so they
are all equal (S = O = M) or we might find that ALL
conditions differ from each other (S ≠ O ≠ M), so
they all differ
ii. As an example for this latter (S ≠ O ≠ M), I would
predict no differences between the three conditions
for the dependent variable “Abigail’s behavior was
wrong”
b. Make sure to italicize the F, p, M, and SD (as in the example)

c. Pretty simple, right! I suggest running an ANOVA on any of
the statements in Part II (though I suggest doing more than
one ANOVA here – the practice will help you, so look at
multiple Part II DVs!)
d. You could run a t-Test on one of those Part II dependent
variables as well, but for this semester’s study on consensus,
I actually want you to run a t-Test on Part III Question #3.
Here’s how:
iii. t-Test: If you have only two levels to your IV (e.g. Support
and Oppose
only), things are even more simple.
1. Here, you will run a t-Test (a t-Test looks at differences
between
only two groups). Again, your lab presentations tell you how to
run
this, but you can do it on your own as well (you can even run
this if
your study originally has three levels to the IV – when you go
into
the t-Test menu in SPSS, choose “define groups” and select 1
and 2
(Support = 1 and Oppose = 2). This will let you look at two of

the
groups! You could also select “2 and 3” or “1 and 3” where the
Mixed condition = 3).
2. Rather than an F value, we will look at the t value in the t-
Test data
output. Here, we have one number for the degree of freedom, we
have the t value, and we have the p value.
3. The nice thing about a t-Test is that since you only have two
groups,
you do not need a post hoc test like Tukey (you only need that
if you
have to compare three means. Here, we only have two means, so
we
can just look at them and see which one is higher and which is
lower
when our t-Test is significant). Then just write it up …
a. “Using consensus condition (support v. oppose) as our
independent variable and ratings of “I would give Abigail the
same advice that her friends gave her” as our dependent
variable, we failed to find a significant condition effect,
t(203) = 1.12, p > .05. Participants in both the support
condition (M = 4.56, SD = 1.21) and participants in the

oppose condition (M = 4.24, SD = 0.89). said they would
give Abigail the same advice that her friends gave her. This
indicates that participants do pay attention to consensus and
feel fine conforming their own beliefs in line with that
consensus”
b. Repeat for other dependent variables
c. Make sure to italicize the t, p, M , and SD (as in the example)
iv. Statistics order recommendation: For this paper, start your
results section
with the chi square (your manipulation check). Then talk about
your main
analyses (Any question from Part II followed by the analysis of
the Part III
Question #3 dependent variable). Make sure the analyses line up
with your
hypotheses.
e. There is no page minimum or maximum for the results
section, though I would
expect it to be at least a paragraph or two for each dependent
variable
5. Appendices (4 points)

a. I want to make sure you are including the correct numbers in
your results section,
so I want you to include all relevant SPSS tables for each of
your analyses in a
series of appendices.
i. Appendix A: Include your tables for age, gender, and
ethnicity.
ii. Appendix B: Include your tables for your chi square and the
crosstabs
iii. Appendix C: Include your tables for your first dependent
variable (This
must be an ANOVA table, the descriptive statistics table for
that ANOVA,
and the post hoc test whether it is significant or not)
iv. Appendix D: Include your tables for you second dependent
variable (You
should include t-Test tables here. This would involve both the
descriptives
for the t-Test and the t-Test output itself
v. Appendix E: (If applicable)
b. Hint: The best way to get these tables is to copy them
directly from SPSS. In the
SPSS output, right click on the table, copy it, and then paste it
into your appendix.
Another alternative is to use a “snipping” tool (search “snipping

tool” in Microsoft
Word to find it). You can highlight an area on any computer
page and save it as a
picture. Copy the picture and paste it into your appendix. Easy!
i. I’m not worried if your table is not all on the same line. If it
spills over into
the next page, that is fine. I just need to see the full table
c. Make sure to give a proper name to the appendix (e.g.
Appendix A – Study One
Demographics)
6. Discussion Study One (2 points)
a. In this section, tell me about your findings and if they did or
did not support your
results. It might help to refer back to your hypotheses “We
expected to find A but
instead found B” or “We expected to find A and results
supported this hypothesis.”
Explain using plain English why you think your study turned
out the way it did.
b. IMPORTANT – Do NOT give me statistics again here. I can
find those in your
results section. Here, all I want is a plain English summary of
your findings.
c. Also, don’t give me results for a DV if you did not run an
analysis on that DV. Only
tell me about the results you actually looked at in the results

section.
d. There is no length requirement for this section, but I
recommend at least four or five
sentences
7. Overall writing quality (3 points)
a. Make sure you check your paper for proper spelling and
grammar. The FIU writing
center is available if you want someone to look over your paper
(an extra eye is
always good!) and give you advice. I highly recommend them,
as writing quality
will become even more important on future papers. I also
recommend visiting the
FIU Research Methods Help Center if you need additional
guidance with writing or
statistical analyses. Also, remember to upload this paper
through the Pearson writer
before uploading to Canvas!
b. Make sure to use the past tense throughout your paper. You
already did the paper,
so don’t tell me what participants are going to do. Tell me what
they did!
Other Guidelines for Paper II – Methods and Results (Study
One)

▪ 1). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins should be one
inch. You must use a 12-point
font in Times New Roman.
▪ 2). PLEASE use a spell checker and/or Pearson Writer to
avoid unnecessary errors.
Proofread everything you write. I actually recommend reading
some sentences aloud to see
if they flow well, or getting family or friends to read your work.
▪ Use the Paper II Checklist on the next page before you turn in
your paper to make sure it is
the best paper you can write!
▪ Finally, go look at the supporting documents for this paper.
Like Paper I, there is a
checklist, a grade rubric, and an example paper for Paper II. All
will give you more
information about what we are specifically looking for as well
as a visual example of how
to put it all together in your paper. Good luck!
Checklist – Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and
Discussion

Use the check sheet below to make sure your paper is the best it
can be! Make sure you answer
“Yes” to all questions before submitting your paper! The first
two sections duplicate the Paper I
checklist, but those elements in purple are unique to you
Methods / Results / Discussion Paper II
General Paper Format (This section is identical to the Paper I
Checklist)
Yes No
1. Is everything in your paper (including headers, the main
body of your mini-
literature review, and your references) in 12 point Times New
Roman font?
2. Is everything in your paper double spaced, including
references (here I mean
the spacing above and below each line, not the spaces following
a period)?
3. Do you have one inch margins on all sides of the paper (one
inch from the top
of the page, one inch from the bottom, and one inch from each
side)
4. Are the first lines of all paragraphs indented another ½ inch
(or 1 ½ inches
from the page edge)?
5. Are your paragraphs aligned left? (That is, text should be
flush left, with lines

lining up on the left of the page, but text should NOT line up on
the right side
of the page – it should look ragged)
6. Do you need help figuring out how to configure a word
document in APA
format (inserting headers, page numbers, proper indents, etc.)?
If YES or NO,
I highly recommend watching this video which walks you
through setting up
an APA formatted paper!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY
Title page (This section is nearly identical to the Paper I
Checklist)
Yes No Header
1. Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header
(with a lower case h)?
2. Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL CAPS?
3. Is your Running head in 12 point Times New Roman font?
4. Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12
point Times New
Roman font)?
5. Is your header 50 characters or less (including spaces and
punctuation)?

Title / Name / Institution
1. Is your title 12 words or less (as recommended by the
APA)?
2. Does your title describe your general paper theme (while
avoiding something
blank like “Paper Two: Methods Results, and Discussion”)?
Note that your
header and title can differ!
3. Do all title words with three letters or more start with a
capital letter?
4. Are your name and institution correct?
5. Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and
in 12 point Times
New Roman font?
Methods Section (New Information in this section)
Yes No Header
1. Is your header title present and identical to your header title
on the title page?
2. Is your header title in ALL CAPS and 12 point Times New
Roman font?
3. Does your header on this second page omit the phrase
“Running head”
4. Do you have a page number starting on page 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY
Yes No Title for the methods section
1. Is the word “Methods” centered and in bold at the top of
your methods page?
Participants
1. Do you have the word “Participants” flush left and in bold,
right below the
word “Methods”?
2. Did you list out your demographic characteristics, including
gender, age, and
ethnicity / race?
3. Did you provide the descriptive statistics for (means and
standard deviations)
for age and italicize the letters M and SD?
4. Did you provide frequencies for gender and ethnicity/race
and italicize the N?
5. Did you refer readers to Appendix for the full listing of
demographic tables?
Materials and Procedure
1. Did you mention informed consent?
2. Did you discuss any instructions the participant may have
read?

3. Did you thoroughly describe any stimulus material that
might have occurred
before your actual independent variables (and photos,
descriptions, profiles,
questions, puzzles, etc.) that are a part of your study?
4. Did you thoroughly describe your independent variable (IV)
in enough depth
and detail that another researcher could recreate your materials?
5. Did you give your IV a name that matches up with the name
you refer to in
the results section?
6. Did you describe all of your most relevant dependent
variables, noting the
scales you used (e.g. “Yes / No”, “A scale ranging from 1 (not
at all likely) to
9 (very likely))” for EACH of your DVs?
7. Did you fully describe what participants went through in the
study, noting the
order in which they received study materials (e.g. first informed
consent, then
IVs, DVs, and debriefing)?
8. Did you fully describe your attention check (manipulation
check) with enough
detail that a reader unfamiliar with your study could recreate it,
and did you
include the scale for that attention check question?

9. Did you use the past tense when describing your methods
(seeing how you
already collected the data, and therefore do not discuss what
participants will
do)?
Results Section (New Information in this section)
Yes No
1. Do you have the word “Results” centered and in bold,
immediately following
the methods section?
2. Was the first dependent variable you looked at your
manipulation check
question, and did you make sure you analyzed the correct DV?
3. Did you analyze at least two different dependent variables
for your other two
analyses?
a. Note: using a t-Test to analyze a question Like #3) and an
ANOVA to
once again analyze question #3 does NOT count as two different
DVs. It
is the same DV analyzed twice. Make sure to look at two
different DVs
4. Did you mention both the IV and the DV by name when
talking about your
analysis?

5. Did you include means and standard deviations within
parentheses for each
level of your independent variable?
6. Did you italicize the letters F, t, p, M, SD, and X2 (where
appropriate)?
7. Did you round ALL numbers to two decimal places (with
the exception of the
p value, which can go as low as p < .001 or p = .001).
Discussion Section (New Information in this section)
Yes No
1. Do you have the word “Discussion” centered and in bold,
immediately
following the results section?
2. Did you remind your reader of your hypothesis?
3. Did you mention whether you supported or did not support
your hypothesis?
Appendix Section – Study One (New Information in this
section)
Yes No
1. Do you have the word “Appendix” centered on each
Appendix page,
followed by a description of the appendix content, immediately

following the
results section?
2. In Appendix A (Demographics), do you have SPSS tables
for gender,
ethnicity, and age? (Note: Age might be in a general “statistics”
table, but you
should have specific frequency tables for both gender and
ethnicity)
3. In Appendix B (Chi Square), do you have the crosstabs table
(with
percentages) plus the chi square test (with Pearson)?
4. In Appendix C (ANOVA), do you have the descriptives
table, the ANOVA
table, and the post hoc table for your first dependent variable?
5. In Appendix D (ANOVA or t-Test), do you have the
descriptives table,
ANOVA (or t-Test) table, and post hoc table (for the ANOVA)
for your
second dependent variable?
6. Do the analyses in Appendix C and D focus on DIFFERENT
dependent
variables? (Make sure you answer YES on this one!)
Writing Quality
Yes No 1. Did you proofread your paper, go to the writing
center, go to the research

methods help center, or use the Pearson writer to make sure
your paper flows
well?
2. Did you use the past tense (which is recommended, since
your papers in this
class will reflect work you already did rather than work you will
do)?
3. Did you use a scientific / objective terms like “people”,
“participants”. “users”,
“readers”, etc. (as opposed to subjective words like “you”,
“we”, “me”, “I”, or
“us”, etc.)?

Research Study – Florida International University – Spring, 2020.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Research Study – Florida International University – Spring, 2020.docx

Similar to Research Study – Florida International University – Spring, 2020.docx (20)

More from audeleypearl

More from audeleypearl (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Research Study – Florida International University – Spring, 2020.docx